FTC Consumer Protection Bureau Director Andrew Smith worked with 54 clients that could trigger his recusal, including Equifax, PayPal and Uber, according to agency records we obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request. The clients paid Smith $5,000 or more in a given year dating back two years from his May 21 appointment. By signing President Donald Trump’s ethics pledge, Smith for two years after his appointment can't participate “in any particular matter involving specific parties that is directly and substantially related to [a] former employer or former clients, including regulations and contracts.”

FTC Consumer Protection Bureau Director Andrew Smith worked with 54 clients that could trigger his recusal, including Equifax, PayPal and Uber, according to agency records we obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request. The clients paid Smith $5,000 or more in a given year dating back two years from his May 21 appointment. By signing President Donald Trump’s ethics pledge, Smith for two years after his appointment can't participate “in any particular matter involving specific parties that is directly and substantially related to [a] former employer or former clients, including regulations and contracts.”

SCOTTSDALE, Ariz. -- Application programming interfaces must be included in the Lifeline national verifier so carriers can help low-income fund recipients with enrollment, said a NARUC resolution passed Wednesday. NARUC cleared that and other resolutions on separations, IP captioned telephone service (IP CTS) and precision agriculture (see 1807030052). NARUC is following the national verifier closely, with the API resolution setting up a big push planned for Lifeline Awareness Week this September, a spokesperson said.

Congress must do more to encourage rural broadband deployment, House Communications Subcommittee members said at a hearing Tuesday. There was general bipartisan agreement on the need to promote various technological solutions and on certain ongoing legislative efforts to remove deployment barriers. Discord was heard on federal infrastructure spending and municipal broadband.

Congress must do more to encourage rural broadband deployment, House Communications Subcommittee members said at a hearing Tuesday. There was general bipartisan agreement on the need to promote various technological solutions and on certain ongoing legislative efforts to remove deployment barriers. Discord was heard on federal infrastructure spending and municipal broadband.

The auto industry is launching a media blitz this week with TV and print ads, and a "drive-in" press event of American workers from German, Japanese and other foreign-owned auto plants. The TV ad, paid for by the Association of Global Automakers, uses the kind of imagery often used in political ads -- a barn in a field of grain -- and a deep-voiced narrator noting that foreign automakers have plants in Indiana, Kentucky, Alabama, Georgia, Tennessee, Mississippi and Ohio. Every one of those states voted for Trump in 2016.

With the publication of the Office of U.S. Trade Representative’s notice in Wednesday’s Federal Register on procedures for requesting exclusions from Trade Act Section 301 tariffs on Chinese imports (see 1807080001), docket USTR-2018-0025 for posting such requests became active in the regulations.gov portal. No requests were posted yet by our Friday deadline. Exclusion requests are due by Oct. 9, and if granted will apply for a year retroactively to July 6, said the notice. Once a request is posted, the public will have 14 days to file responses to that request, it said. After that 14-day period, “interested persons” will have seven days to reply to those responses, it said. Though Oct. 9 is the deadline for the exclusion requests, “international trade team” lawyers at BakerHostetler are “advising clients to file as soon as possible in anticipation of the large administrative backlog that they expect.” Though the Trump administration’s threat to impose 10 percent tariffs on an additional $200 billion worth of Chinese imports (see 1807110034) “doesn't necessarily raise the risk of an all-out trade war, the tariffs would affect some industries and individual corporate borrowers,” said S&P Global Friday. Together with the 25 percent tariffs enacted July 6 on $34 billion in Chinese imports and the proposal to impose tariffs on another $16 billion in goods, “the total amount of $250 billion now represents about half the value of China's annual exports to the U.S.,” it said. The absence of an immediate “tit-for-tat” retaliatory response from China “lends hope to the belief that China-U.S. trade negotiations aren't completely off the table,” said S&P. “We are obviously not sanguine about the risk. Our current base-case assumption is that the tariffs, if imposed, will not likely greatly affect either economy. However, they would affect some industries and individual corporations.” The U.S.-China friction already is contributing to “jitters in the financial markets and is coloring business investment decisions,” said S&P. If China wants to retaliate with tariffs on U.S. goods, it “can’t match” the $200 billion figure because American imports to China totaled only $130 billion last year, it said: “Should China opt to pursue non-tariff actions that affect services and investments, it could damage global business and consumer confidence, investment prospects, and growth.”

With the publication of the Office of U.S. Trade Representative’s notice in Wednesday’s Federal Register on procedures for requesting exclusions from Trade Act Section 301 tariffs on Chinese imports (see 1807080001), docket USTR-2018-0025 for posting such requests became active in the regulations.gov portal. No requests were posted yet by our Friday deadline. Exclusion requests are due by Oct. 9, and if granted will apply for a year retroactively to July 6, said the notice. Once a request is posted, the public will have 14 days to file responses to that request, it said. After that 14-day period, “interested persons” will have seven days to reply to those responses, it said. Though Oct. 9 is the deadline for the exclusion requests, “international trade team” lawyers at BakerHostetler are “advising clients to file as soon as possible in anticipation of the large administrative backlog that they expect.” Though the Trump administration’s threat to impose 10 percent tariffs on an additional $200 billion worth of Chinese imports (see 1807110034) “doesn't necessarily raise the risk of an all-out trade war, the tariffs would affect some industries and individual corporate borrowers,” said S&P Global Friday. Together with the 25 percent tariffs enacted July 6 on $34 billion in Chinese imports and the proposal to impose tariffs on another $16 billion in goods, “the total amount of $250 billion now represents about half the value of China's annual exports to the U.S.,” it said. The absence of an immediate “tit-for-tat” retaliatory response from China “lends hope to the belief that China-U.S. trade negotiations aren't completely off the table,” said S&P. “We are obviously not sanguine about the risk. Our current base-case assumption is that the tariffs, if imposed, will not likely greatly affect either economy. However, they would affect some industries and individual corporations.” The U.S.-China friction already is contributing to “jitters in the financial markets and is coloring business investment decisions,” said S&P. If China wants to retaliate with tariffs on U.S. goods, it “can’t match” the $200 billion figure because American imports to China totaled only $130 billion last year, it said: “Should China opt to pursue non-tariff actions that affect services and investments, it could damage global business and consumer confidence, investment prospects, and growth.”

With the publication of the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative’s notice in the July 11 Federal Register on procedures for requesting exclusions from Trade Act Section 301 tariffs on Chinese imports (see 1807100049), docket USTR-2018-0025 for posting such requests became active in the regulations.gov portal. No requests were posted yet as of International Trade Today's deadline. Exclusion requests are due by Oct. 9, and if granted will apply for a year retroactively to July 6, the notice said. Though Oct. 9 is the deadline for the exclusion requests, international trade lawyers at BakerHostetler are advising "clients to file as soon as possible in anticipation of the large administrative backlog that they expect,” the law firm said.

With the publication of the Office of U.S. Trade Representative’s notice in Wednesday’s Federal Register on procedures for requesting exclusions from Trade Act Section 301 tariffs on Chinese imports (see 1807080001), docket USTR-2018-0025 for posting such requests became active in the regulations.gov portal. No requests were posted yet by our Friday deadline. Exclusion requests are due by Oct. 9, and if granted will apply for a year retroactively to July 6, said the notice. Once a request is posted, the public will have 14 days to file responses to that request, it said. After that 14-day period, “interested persons” will have seven days to reply to those responses, it said. Though Oct. 9 is the deadline for the exclusion requests, “international trade team” lawyers at BakerHostetler are “advising clients to file as soon as possible in anticipation of the large administrative backlog that they expect.” Though the Trump administration’s threat to impose 10 percent tariffs on an additional $200 billion worth of Chinese imports (see 1807110034) “doesn't necessarily raise the risk of an all-out trade war, the tariffs would affect some industries and individual corporate borrowers,” said S&P Global Friday. Together with the 25 percent tariffs enacted July 6 on $34 billion in Chinese imports and the proposal to impose tariffs on another $16 billion in goods, “the total amount of $250 billion now represents about half the value of China's annual exports to the U.S.,” it said. The absence of an immediate “tit-for-tat” retaliatory response from China “lends hope to the belief that China-U.S. trade negotiations aren't completely off the table,” said S&P. “We are obviously not sanguine about the risk. Our current base-case assumption is that the tariffs, if imposed, will not likely greatly affect either economy. However, they would affect some industries and individual corporations.” The U.S.-China friction already is contributing to “jitters in the financial markets and is coloring business investment decisions,” said S&P. If China wants to retaliate with tariffs on U.S. goods, it “can’t match” the $200 billion figure because American imports to China totaled only $130 billion last year, it said: “Should China opt to pursue non-tariff actions that affect services and investments, it could damage global business and consumer confidence, investment prospects, and growth.”